AIBU to let my daughter’s boyfriend use marked visitor parking regularly?

[NBParking]

NC’d as outing.

Recently moved onto a new build estate, up the road from us is three terraced houses with five parking spots in front of them. Each of the three houses have one and two are very clearly marked as visitor spots.

My DDs boyfriend visits us regularly, can vary from one night a week to 2/3 nights depending on both their shift patterns. She has been parking in one of the visitor spots.

The first of the three residents moved in last week. Yesterday one of the site managers knocked on the door and asked DD to move the car as the houses are now lived in and the resident had complained (some people / contractors park on the still empty houses). DD explained that it was visitor parking and that is was our visitor parked there. Site manager said he would need to go away and look at the plans (thought he would have done this before coming over tbf).

So AIBU to tell him to continue to park there? Legally he can, rules are visitors up to 48 hours at a time (I’ve checked the convents we signed). I would HATE someone effectively parked on my drive, outside my window etc but I would never have bought that house. Resident must have seen and signed the same plans as us?

If the resident comes over to speak to us, how would you respond?

Site plan attached.

No I’m not. Even if one parent can do all the drop offs and still get to the station to commute or drive the commute what about the other parent? They both need cars at the same time.

As pp pointed out transport has generally worsened not improved over the past 4 years. Back in the 80s where I lived most houses had two cars for the same reason - more than one working adult needing to commute plus of course the extra complexity of juggling conflicting childcare locations. Commuting trips were already non local in the main.

I think its you who were the outlier if you were really playing out in a nice, largely car free/ample off street parking street more recently than the 70s

I think you're being unreasonable, look at the parking per household on all the detached and semi detached, and then look at ratio for the terraced which may have same size families inside. It's clearly fairer to have the residents using those parking spaces, as they dont have two parking spaces per household like everyone else. @

Those residents would have known when purchasing that they only get one space and I expect a house with two spaces cost more.

Why is it fair that someone who has paid more doesn't get to access visitor spaces just because someone decided at the time they didn't have the money/thought they would take the risk in not buying a house with two allocated spaces or whatever other reason.

Also if they bought with the intention of using the visitor spaces it sounds like they would be breeching the agreement regarding the use and would have to keep moving cars off the estate anyway to fit the 48 hour rule.

Those still aren't the type of families I have been talking about, or responding to in the thread. If you read my responses you'd know I was talking about parents both having cars + all children having their own cars, which is a complete waste of public space, let alone any environmental impact which I've stayed silent about because it's not been relevant. Those are 100% families which could share cars or just use an alternative means.

You can argue all you want against something I never said, but it will still be irrelevant to me.

I dont think they were worried about that specific risk, it was more of a very basic overall common sense thing I think, like not letting your kid play with matches, or eat slugs, or stick a hair pin into a plug socket. Simple and obvious "do what you can to help keep your kid alive" type parenting stuff.

This happened on the David Wilson estate that I moved in to. There were mostly terraced houses and then there were four flats and the spaces outside those were visitor spaces, marked with a V. The people in the flats had been told the spaces were only for their visitors and everyone else had been told they were for everyone. It caused no end of problems because of course any legitimate visitors in the street just parked in them.

It dragged on for years but eventually David Wilson had to step in and the spaces were allocated just to the flats. As was probably intended in the first place.

It caused huge problems. Actual fighting, police, the lot. We made sure we never ever parked in the spaces as we did not want to be involved.

3 days is 72 hours not 48 hours.

[2 says = 48 hours
1 day = 24 hours]

saw the rest of explanation only after posting- thanks.

Can’t the boyfriend leave his car at his parents and DD collect him in her car? It does sound like those visitors spaces are for the terrace houses…

Depends on what you mean by "days". Yes, 3 full days is 72 hours. Coming Friday evening and leaving Sunday afternoon is under 48 hours, but spans across three days.

Anyway, with more people moving to the estate, the chances to get this space will become smaller and smaller. People will selfishly try to claim it for their residential parking, and I'm not sure the estate management will be ready to police it. Though they really should if they want to keep the roads clear and have some visitor spaces available.

"It does sound it" based on what exactly?

Being marked in green as "visitor parking" at OP's home materials?

On the basis the terraced houses have fewer spaces than other residents.

No... I don't think so.

Which will have been reflected in the price of the house. Any time I've looked into purchasing places like this, it was clearly stated how much each parking space was.

In fact the one I had the most knowledge of, they actually had you commit to reducing your car ownership. Of course then they failed to get any decent public transport or basic walkable facilities into the area, so now it's a nightmare of people parking their cars anywhere they could.

Morally right?

The buyers in those houses bought them knowing they had visitor spaces right in front of their windows.

They're for visitors… of anyone on the estate.

I would say these spaces are visitors parking for the estate based on the plan. Poor planning on behalf of the developer, and the home owners buying there were probably hoping the other estate owners weren’t overly familiar with ‘driveway’ spaces being allocated visitor parking. Did the site manager come back to you?

Yes the days are spread out not the a solid three days over a weekend.

I agree with this.

edited to say I see you ve said that’s not what the sales office said. So maybe you do have a legal right to park there. But I do think that while he meets the technicality of being a visitor I’m not sure using it so frequently is in the spirit of being a visitor 😁

Quickest way to cause upset on MN and IRL. Parking.

If the building companies built houses that are fit for purpose we would not have this issue. When i moved house 8 years ago looking at new builds, 4 bed house with 2 spaces just were not suitable, ended up going for a much older property on the estate, 3 bed. At the time we had 4 vehicles between 2 of us. Now I have just one and my car looks very lonely on the drive. However I know when the kids are older they will soon fill it so I will carry on enjoying the emptiness.

P.S. I feel that these spaces are for the terrace houses. This looked to be the fair way of doing it, ideally they wanted to give each house 2 spaces but the plan wouldn't allow this so the compromise was one each and leave the 3 houses to fight it out for the other 2. Have you thought about the maintenance in 10 years time? The likely hood is the 3 houses would take this on rather than the whole estate.

Agree with this!
Parking is a mare in new builds …he’s overusing I think and as more people arrive it will become tougher!
car park wars 🤣

The maintenance will fall to the site management company which we all pay towards (and possibly us more then them based on the size of property, although I’m not certain on this).

Agreed! Also OP has paid for 2 parking. It can be that someone with 1 parking would feel, op must still to those 2 parking, which is not right either.

further, as another poster said, visitors parking should be for visiting nurses etc etc; and not for anyone (residents incl) hoarding it weekly/ regularly!

Meant to quote you…

post
Updatesharing · Today 18:49
Agreed! Also OP has paid for 2 parking. It can be that someone with 1 parking would feel, op must still to those 2 parking, which is not right either.
further, as another poster said, visitors parking should be for visiting nurses etc etc; and not for anyone (residents incl) hoarding it weekly/ regularly!

OP said that the other visitor spots in the image are either always in use or not yet open (along with others off the image). I don't think it's reasonable for them to ask that visitor spots are not used by visitors though, they chose to purchase that house with the visitor parking outside

….. except for the BF’s car, which is there for approximately 50% of the time. Sorry OP, but you’ve suggested that other residents were given the opportunity to purchase suitable properties with adequate parking. Given that, it could be considered that you also had the opportunity to purchase a property with adequate parking, ie for 3 vehicles.

He isn’t resident, he doesn’t live here and never will. So not buying a property that suits a visitor.
Three days is the extreme end and definitely more 1-2 days generally.